hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Konstantin Shvachko (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Created: (HADOOP-2185) Server ports: to roll or not to roll.
Date Sat, 10 Nov 2007 03:15:50 GMT
Server ports: to roll or not to roll.

                 Key: HADOOP-2185
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-2185
             Project: Hadoop
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: conf, dfs, mapred
    Affects Versions: 0.15.0
            Reporter: Konstantin Shvachko
             Fix For: 0.16.0

Looked at the issues related to port rolling. My impression is that port rolling is required
only for the unit tests to run.
Even the name-node port should roll there, which we don't have now, in order to be able to
start 2 cluster for testing say dist cp.

For real clusters on the contrary port rolling is not desired and some times even prohibited.
So we should have a way of to ban port rolling. My proposition is to
# use ephemeral port 0 if port rolling is desired
# if a specific port is specified then port rolling should not happen at all, meaning that
server is either able or not able to start on that particular port.

The desired port is specified via configuration parameters.
- Name-node: fs.default.name = host:port
- Data-node: dfs.datanode.port
- Job-tracker: mapred.job.tracker = host:port
- Task-tracker: mapred.task.tracker.report.bindAddress = host
  Task-tracker currently does not have an option to specify port, it always uses the ephemeral
port 0, 
  and therefore I propose to add one.
- Secondary node does not need a port to listen on.

For info servers we have two sets of config variables *.info.bindAddress and *.info.port
except for the task tracker, which calls them *.http.bindAddress and *.http.port instead of
With respect to the info servers I propose to completely eliminate the port parameters, and
*.info.bindAddress = host:port
Info servers should do the same thing, namely start or fail on the specified port if it is
not 0,
and start on any free port if it is ephemeral.

For the task-tracker I would rename tasktracker.http.bindAddress to mapred.task.tracker.info.bindAddress
For the data-node the info dfs.datanode.info.bindAddress should be included into the default
Is there a reason why it is not there?

This is the summarizes of proposed changes:
|| Server || current name = value || proposed name = value ||
| NameNode | fs.default.name = host:port | same |
| | dfs.info.bindAddress = host | dfs.info.bindAddress = host:port |
| DataNode | dfs.datanode.port = port | same |
| | dfs.datanode.info.bindAddress = host | dfs.datanode.info.bindAddress = host:port |
| | dfs.datanode.info.port = port | eliminate |
| JobTracker| mapred.job.tracker = host:port | same |
| | mapred.task.tracker.info.bindAddress = host | mapred.task.tracker.info.bindAddress = host:port
| | mapred.task.tracker.info.port = port | eliminate |
| TaskTracker| mapred.task.tracker.report.bindAddress = host | mapred.task.tracker.report.bindAddress
= host:port |
| | tasktracker.http.bindAddress = host | mapred.task.tracker.info.bindAddress = host:port
| | tasktracker.http.port = port | eliminate |
| SecondaryNameNode | dfs.secondary.info.bindAddress = host | dfs.secondary.info.bindAddress
= host:port |
| | dfs.secondary.info.port = port | eliminate |

Do we also want to set some uniform naming convention for the configuration variables?
Like having hdfs instead of dfs, or info instead of http, or systematically using either datanode
or data.node would make that look better in my opinion.

So these are all +*api*+ changes. I would +*really*+ like some feedback on this, especially
people who deal with configuration issues on practice.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message